Their have been Rumors about LED base screens about Solid State Drives.
What if the present MBP became the new MB and the new MBP incorporated the rumored above with the new Santa Rosa chip set?
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
it still use up system ram. ATI and nivdia make cards that have some of there own ram and take some form system ram that is better then having the card use 100% system ram way can't intel do this?
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
No, the main advantage will be in the 800MHz FSB, along with FSB throttling for power savings. At least for the Pros.
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
Intel is finally EOLing some of the Pentium chip and chip sets. They don't just stop making someting when the next generation comes along. They have to supply chips to repairs and replacements and my guess that this is for atleast 2 years.
I'd think that putting a 1680x1050 screen on a 15" laptop would be a good sign of them having lost their marbles. That's a ridiculous resolution without a resolution independent OS and applications.
Leopard is supposed to be resolution-independent.
Quote:
You may WANT a 15" laptop but I bet you don't want a 1280x800 screen and integrated graphics like almost every cheap consumer widescreen laptop out there. I suspect that would be what Apple would give you otherwise there would be little reason to buy a Pro.
Lots of people want 15" laptops, its the most popular size these days. Apple can certainly cripple a 15" MB it if it wants to in order to avoid cannibalizing MB Pro sales, but as always, if they refuse to cannibalize their own sales, PC laptop makers will do it for them, by offering full-featured 15" notebooks at a very good price.
Remember, its not the old days anymore. About half of Mac sales now are to folks who are new to the platform, and they don't automatically rule out the PC side the way longtime Mac users do. The game has changed, baby. Apple needs to keep up, or at least stay within shouting distance, value-wise. 8)
Anything higher than 1440x900 for the MBP? This res is too big, an res independent apps are gona take foreva. I want a higher res option thanks and more USB ports an 2x eSATA.
1680x1050 is starting to happen on the PC notebook side, and not just on 17" either. Would hope that Apple follows suit soon, at least by the time Leopard releases (which is allegedly resolution-independent, though of course the apps won't be at first).
The entire switch to Intel is new and exciting. Apple having sold nearly 2 million computers in 2006, many people seem to agree.
Eh? This seems to contradict your earlier statement:
(The ability to run Windows is) only a selling point to people who are already interested in using OS X. The far majority of people don't care.
So everyone is excited about the Intel switch because of performance reasons only? I think many would disagree.
Also, the Intel switch was a 2005-2006 story. What, going forward, is going to maintain Mac sales momentum in the face of Vista? Leopard alone? I hope not. I'd like to see Apple plug some product line holes to boost Mac sales, and judging from recent AI reports of a 15" MB AND a Mac subnotebook, I think they're finally figuring that out.
Quote:
I believe Apple's market share growth is based on the strength and acceptance of OS X and its software more than the configuration of its hardware.
Which is why you cite the Intel switch above and immediately follow it with a note about how well Macs are selling recently? Hmm... :
The entire switch to Intel is new and exciting. Apple having sold nearly 2 million computers in 2006, many people seem to agree.
C'mon Teno, its apparently obvious to you as well as I that Apple's share growth is based on a combination of factors, both software AND hardware.
Quote:
I think its fine they offer more laptop options. I'm just saying they should not follow Dell.
I completely agree with you. But it seems that every time anyone says that Apple should expand their BTO options a bit, they're accused of wanting to 'Dell-ify' Apple. There's certainly room for Apple to offer more of the BTO options people want (such as in graphics), without getting as expansive and confusing (bloated, some would say) in BTO options as Dell as become. There is a happy middle ground.
Quote:
Its hard to tell I hear a lot more bellyaching about Apple pricing on this board than I hear out in regular life.
Which you'd expect, since folks who are on the Internet lots tend to be more tech-savvy and care more about such things.
Quote:
Ultimately only Apple knows the feasibility of this, I'm sure their are some pretty strict heat tolerances in Apple's notebooks. What would be the point of putting in a faster GPU but forced to under-clock it to keep the heat manageable.
Graphics chips makers in recent years have become more concerned about things like heat and power consumption. You can still point to some products that are bad on these scores, but overall they seem to be following Intel's lead in making power and heat bigger priorities. I'm sure there's a GPU on the market that would not be terribly onerous on these scores, if not, Apple can certainly work with ATI or nVidia on having one made. Let's face it, integrated graphics blow.
Quote:
I agree Apple should broaden its notebook offers, which it sounds as if they are doing. But I don't see he point of offering a 17" laptop with MacBook innards.
As someone else has already mentioned, why not? With appropriate BTO, you could have that if you wanted. And that's another Mac sale, regardless of whether or not you or I think its a good idea (though I personally would tend to agree with you).
Yeah, its a bummer that the apps won't support it for awhile (which was obvious before), but still, going forward, do I not want a display on my MB/MBP that can take advantage of it? Or am I supposed to toss my notebook purchased in '07 with Leopard pre-installed, and then buy a new one in '08 to take advantage of features that Leopard allows? Good luck with that.
Seems to me like you'd want to start selling 'Leopard ready' notebooks by the time Leopard actually ships, but there are arguments pro and con. I myself would feel ripped off if I bought a Leopard notebook and then found out that it can't really take advantage of what Leopard and compliant apps can do.
Hm... was that before or after Apple confirmed that Leopard will be resolution-independent?:
Ummm. It's straight from the horse's mouth, in the WWDC '06 Mac OS X SOTU. The OS will have the technology, but they don't expect software to be ready until 2008.
Ummm. It's straight from the horse's mouth, in the WWDC '06 Mac OS X SOTU. The OS will have the technology, but they don't expect software to be ready until 2008.
That's about the timetable I figured on, but I hadn't yet heard of an official announcement confirming it. Thanks for that.
Apple Inc. next quarter will expand its consumer line of 'MacBook' notebooks to include a 15.4-inch model.
If true, this is really good news for me. I´ve hold off buying an Apple laptop because the 13,3 inch screen is too small for me and the MB Pro somewhat pricey. Though worth every euro cent, there are only so much purchasing power in a student´s purse
the current Core 2 Duos used in the MB, MBP, and iMac are all Meroms.
Yep. Santa Rosa is the mobile version of the 965 chipset aka GMA 3000. New Meroms will be relased with the chipset to take advantage of the faster bus and new socket.
Santa Rosa is a platform, i.e. combination of CPU, chipset, WiFi chip, etc. Apple will likely not use Santa Rosa, as they haven't used its predecessors either. Apple will, however, very likely use technology that Santa Rosa brings to us, such as the Mobile 965 Express chipset, and possibly the Robson Flash technology.
I specifically stated 'and applications'. It's no use having a gorgeous resolution independent desktop if you're apps are running as postage stamps with fine print a lawyer couldn't read.
Even today we've still got a large number of PowerPC only applications. Some software companies are really dragging their feet. For instance, many companies use MYOB for accounting. They've currently got 'no plans' to port to Intel - I've asked. We're switching to MoneyWorks - http://cognito.co.nz/
Resolution independent applications will be an even slower switch as it's not just a recompile away for the easy Intel conversions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Lots of people want 15" laptops, its the most popular size these days. Apple can certainly cripple a 15" MB it if it wants to in order to avoid cannibalizing MB Pro sales, but as always, if they refuse to cannibalize their own sales, PC laptop makers will do it for them, by offering full-featured 15" notebooks at a very good price.
It's popular because there is a glut of cheap 1280x800 panels for cheap laptops. They're cheaper than the panels Apple uses in the MacBook even because they're less pixel dense and easier to manufacture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Remember, its not the old days anymore. About half of Mac sales now are to folks who are new to the platform, and they don't automatically rule out the PC side the way longtime Mac users do. The game has changed, baby. Apple needs to keep up, or at least stay within shouting distance, value-wise. 8)
They ARE doing that value wise but not price wise. They don't need to compete on price. Not competing on price is rule No. 1 they teach you when running a business. Customers who value price above all else aren't worth having as customers.
So everyone is excited about the Intel switch because of performance reasons only? I think many would disagree.
Yup. That was the gist of it. Back at the switch it was clear that laptops were going to be the major platform going forward and the G4 wasn't going to get close to the performance of the Core Duo. And IBM weren't getting the 970 down to laptop temperatures. Apple were faced with the cold hard fact that they'd be selling 1.5Ghz single core CPUs with a 166Mhz bus in a £2500 laptop when Acer would be selling a 2Ghz dual core CPU with a 533Ghz bus in an £800 laptop.
G5 was fine for PowerMacs and the XServe. It's still quicker today at many things, but laptops is where the mass market is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Also, the Intel switch was a 2005-2006 story. What, going forward, is going to maintain Mac sales momentum in the face of Vista? Leopard alone? I hope not. I'd like to see Apple plug some product line holes to boost Mac sales, and judging from recent AI reports of a 15" MB AND a Mac subnotebook, I think they're finally figuring that out.
The Intel switch isn't over. There's still a lot of software to switch over yet which many people are waiting on before buying new hardware. I've got no reason to buy an Intel yet since my G5 is faster than any Intel at doing what I do most of the day until the software I use is native on Intel. I'm waiting on Adobe Creative Suite and all the Macromedia tools specifically. I'd guess there's a couple of million Mac users of those suites waiting.
Apple are obviously targeting PC upgraders currently who would otherwise choose Vista after XP and asking them, since they've a big upgrade to do anyway, to go Mac. It's not really about the hardware, it's about the software. So yes, Leopard IS Apple's answer to Vista.
Filling in niches like a sub-notebook isn't going to dramatically make a difference and a Digitimes rumour isn't the most solid of things to put your beliefs on or hang your purchasing decisions on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
Let's face it, integrated graphics blow.
Let's face it, integrated graphics are more than most people actually need, run CoreGraphics just fine and require a 20th of the power some discrete graphics chips use. Perfect for most laptops in fact that never see anything more complicated than a dashboard widget or a copy of Word. They got a bad rap when they first came out, and rightly so, but the recent chips like the 950 aren't half bad.
Seems to me like you'd want to start selling 'Leopard ready' notebooks by the time Leopard actually ships, but there are arguments pro and con. I myself would feel ripped off if I bought a Leopard notebook and then found out that it can't really take advantage of what Leopard and compliant apps can do.
Er, the current laptops are 'leopard ready'. I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s. You don't need a ultra-high dpi screen to run leopard. That's the whole point of resolution independence. The UI scales to the screen dpi.
If you have the developer tools installed, why not play with it now in Tiger. Launch the Quartz Debug tool and set the resolution you want. I quite like 0.83 scale on my iMac. Then launch an application to see it magically scale everything. You'll also note glitches all over the place in some applications.
The OS has been ready for some time. It's the applications that aren't.
I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s.
Which they don't, but your point stands.
Quote:
The OS has been ready for some time. It's the applications that aren't.
Well, in Tiger, there's some stuff lacking. Most importantly, the user interface controls are only provided in 1x1, whereas for Leopard, they'll also be provided in 4x4.
Er, the current laptops are 'leopard ready'. I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s. You don't need a ultra-high dpi screen to run leopard. That's the whole point of resolution independence. The UI scales to the screen dpi.
You might be missing my point. Sure, you can run Leopard on current notebooks if you want to, but taking full advantage of resolution-independence in the way that many people will want to means high-res/high dpi notebook screens, like 1680x1050 (which are already offered on the PC side on 15" models).
I'm aware that app support for res-independence will lag behind Leopard's release, but still, if I buy a notebook that has Leopard pre-installed, I'd want it to be able to take full advantage of Leopard's features. So as a consumer, I'd likely want my Leopard laptop to be able to run high-res & have high dpi.
Comments
Their have been Rumors about LED base screens about Solid State Drives.
What if the present MBP became the new MB and the new MBP incorporated the rumored above with the new Santa Rosa chip set?
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
it still use up system ram. ATI and nivdia make cards that have some of there own ram and take some form system ram that is better then having the card use 100% system ram way can't intel do this?
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
No, the main advantage will be in the 800MHz FSB, along with FSB throttling for power savings. At least for the Pros.
Don't work like that. When Intel changes to Santa Rosa the old chip set will be history across the board. Main advantage is with the upgraded Integrated Graphics - which is not included in MBP.
Intel is finally EOLing some of the Pentium chip and chip sets. They don't just stop making someting when the next generation comes along. They have to supply chips to repairs and replacements and my guess that this is for atleast 2 years.
I'd think that putting a 1680x1050 screen on a 15" laptop would be a good sign of them having lost their marbles. That's a ridiculous resolution without a resolution independent OS and applications.
Leopard is supposed to be resolution-independent.
You may WANT a 15" laptop but I bet you don't want a 1280x800 screen and integrated graphics like almost every cheap consumer widescreen laptop out there. I suspect that would be what Apple would give you otherwise there would be little reason to buy a Pro.
Lots of people want 15" laptops, its the most popular size these days. Apple can certainly cripple a 15" MB it if it wants to in order to avoid cannibalizing MB Pro sales, but as always, if they refuse to cannibalize their own sales, PC laptop makers will do it for them, by offering full-featured 15" notebooks at a very good price.
Remember, its not the old days anymore. About half of Mac sales now are to folks who are new to the platform, and they don't automatically rule out the PC side the way longtime Mac users do. The game has changed, baby. Apple needs to keep up, or at least stay within shouting distance, value-wise. 8)
.
Anything higher than 1440x900 for the MBP? This res is too big, an res independent apps are gona take foreva. I want a higher res option thanks and more USB ports an 2x eSATA.
1680x1050 is starting to happen on the PC notebook side, and not just on 17" either. Would hope that Apple follows suit soon, at least by the time Leopard releases (which is allegedly resolution-independent, though of course the apps won't be at first).
.
Leopard is supposed to be resolution-independent.
Not quite. Apple asked third-party developers to be ready by 2008. So presumably, they won't roll out such displays until then.
The entire switch to Intel is new and exciting. Apple having sold nearly 2 million computers in 2006, many people seem to agree.
Eh? This seems to contradict your earlier statement:
(The ability to run Windows is) only a selling point to people who are already interested in using OS X. The far majority of people don't care.
So everyone is excited about the Intel switch because of performance reasons only? I think many would disagree.
Also, the Intel switch was a 2005-2006 story. What, going forward, is going to maintain Mac sales momentum in the face of Vista? Leopard alone? I hope not. I'd like to see Apple plug some product line holes to boost Mac sales, and judging from recent AI reports of a 15" MB AND a Mac subnotebook, I think they're finally figuring that out.
I believe Apple's market share growth is based on the strength and acceptance of OS X and its software more than the configuration of its hardware.
Which is why you cite the Intel switch above and immediately follow it with a note about how well Macs are selling recently? Hmm... :
The entire switch to Intel is new and exciting. Apple having sold nearly 2 million computers in 2006, many people seem to agree.
C'mon Teno, its apparently obvious to you as well as I that Apple's share growth is based on a combination of factors, both software AND hardware.
I think its fine they offer more laptop options. I'm just saying they should not follow Dell.
I completely agree with you. But it seems that every time anyone says that Apple should expand their BTO options a bit, they're accused of wanting to 'Dell-ify' Apple. There's certainly room for Apple to offer more of the BTO options people want (such as in graphics), without getting as expansive and confusing (bloated, some would say) in BTO options as Dell as become. There is a happy middle ground.
Its hard to tell I hear a lot more bellyaching about Apple pricing on this board than I hear out in regular life.
Which you'd expect, since folks who are on the Internet lots tend to be more tech-savvy and care more about such things.
Ultimately only Apple knows the feasibility of this, I'm sure their are some pretty strict heat tolerances in Apple's notebooks. What would be the point of putting in a faster GPU but forced to under-clock it to keep the heat manageable.
Graphics chips makers in recent years have become more concerned about things like heat and power consumption. You can still point to some products that are bad on these scores, but overall they seem to be following Intel's lead in making power and heat bigger priorities. I'm sure there's a GPU on the market that would not be terribly onerous on these scores, if not, Apple can certainly work with ATI or nVidia on having one made. Let's face it, integrated graphics blow.
I agree Apple should broaden its notebook offers, which it sounds as if they are doing. But I don't see he point of offering a 17" laptop with MacBook innards.
As someone else has already mentioned, why not? With appropriate BTO, you could have that if you wanted. And that's another Mac sale, regardless of whether or not you or I think its a good idea (though I personally would tend to agree with you).
.
Not quite. Apple asked third-party developers to be ready by 2008. So presumably, they won't roll out such displays until then.
Hm... was that before or after Apple confirmed that Leopard will be resolution-independent?:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2168
Yeah, its a bummer that the apps won't support it for awhile (which was obvious before), but still, going forward, do I not want a display on my MB/MBP that can take advantage of it? Or am I supposed to toss my notebook purchased in '07 with Leopard pre-installed, and then buy a new one in '08 to take advantage of features that Leopard allows?
Seems to me like you'd want to start selling 'Leopard ready' notebooks by the time Leopard actually ships, but there are arguments pro and con. I myself would feel ripped off if I bought a Leopard notebook and then found out that it can't really take advantage of what Leopard and compliant apps can do.
.
Hm... was that before or after Apple confirmed that Leopard will be resolution-independent?:
Ummm. It's straight from the horse's mouth, in the WWDC '06 Mac OS X SOTU. The OS will have the technology, but they don't expect software to be ready until 2008.
Ummm. It's straight from the horse's mouth, in the WWDC '06 Mac OS X SOTU. The OS will have the technology, but they don't expect software to be ready until 2008.
That's about the timetable I figured on, but I hadn't yet heard of an official announcement confirming it. Thanks for that.
.
Apple Inc. next quarter will expand its consumer line of 'MacBook' notebooks to include a 15.4-inch model.
If true, this is really good news for me. I´ve hold off buying an Apple laptop because the 13,3 inch screen is too small for me and the MB Pro somewhat pricey. Though worth every euro cent, there are only so much purchasing power in a student´s purse
A 15" MB would be a welcome addition. My guess is Apple will soon use the Santa Rosa chips for MacBook Pros and Merom chips for MB's.
Meroms are processors, Santa Rosa is a chipset...
the current Core 2 Duos used in the MB, MBP, and iMac are all Meroms.
Meroms are processors, Santa Rosa is a chipset...
the current Core 2 Duos used in the MB, MBP, and iMac are all Meroms.
Yep. Santa Rosa is the mobile version of the 965 chipset aka GMA 3000. New Meroms will be relased with the chipset to take advantage of the faster bus and new socket.
Leopard is supposed to be resolution-independent.
I specifically stated 'and applications'. It's no use having a gorgeous resolution independent desktop if you're apps are running as postage stamps with fine print a lawyer couldn't read.
Even today we've still got a large number of PowerPC only applications. Some software companies are really dragging their feet. For instance, many companies use MYOB for accounting. They've currently got 'no plans' to port to Intel - I've asked. We're switching to MoneyWorks - http://cognito.co.nz/
Resolution independent applications will be an even slower switch as it's not just a recompile away for the easy Intel conversions.
Lots of people want 15" laptops, its the most popular size these days. Apple can certainly cripple a 15" MB it if it wants to in order to avoid cannibalizing MB Pro sales, but as always, if they refuse to cannibalize their own sales, PC laptop makers will do it for them, by offering full-featured 15" notebooks at a very good price.
It's popular because there is a glut of cheap 1280x800 panels for cheap laptops. They're cheaper than the panels Apple uses in the MacBook even because they're less pixel dense and easier to manufacture.
Remember, its not the old days anymore. About half of Mac sales now are to folks who are new to the platform, and they don't automatically rule out the PC side the way longtime Mac users do. The game has changed, baby. Apple needs to keep up, or at least stay within shouting distance, value-wise. 8)
They ARE doing that value wise but not price wise. They don't need to compete on price. Not competing on price is rule No. 1 they teach you when running a business. Customers who value price above all else aren't worth having as customers.
So everyone is excited about the Intel switch because of performance reasons only? I think many would disagree.
Yup. That was the gist of it. Back at the switch it was clear that laptops were going to be the major platform going forward and the G4 wasn't going to get close to the performance of the Core Duo. And IBM weren't getting the 970 down to laptop temperatures. Apple were faced with the cold hard fact that they'd be selling 1.5Ghz single core CPUs with a 166Mhz bus in a £2500 laptop when Acer would be selling a 2Ghz dual core CPU with a 533Ghz bus in an £800 laptop.
G5 was fine for PowerMacs and the XServe. It's still quicker today at many things, but laptops is where the mass market is.
Also, the Intel switch was a 2005-2006 story. What, going forward, is going to maintain Mac sales momentum in the face of Vista? Leopard alone? I hope not. I'd like to see Apple plug some product line holes to boost Mac sales, and judging from recent AI reports of a 15" MB AND a Mac subnotebook, I think they're finally figuring that out.
The Intel switch isn't over. There's still a lot of software to switch over yet which many people are waiting on before buying new hardware. I've got no reason to buy an Intel yet since my G5 is faster than any Intel at doing what I do most of the day until the software I use is native on Intel. I'm waiting on Adobe Creative Suite and all the Macromedia tools specifically. I'd guess there's a couple of million Mac users of those suites waiting.
Apple are obviously targeting PC upgraders currently who would otherwise choose Vista after XP and asking them, since they've a big upgrade to do anyway, to go Mac. It's not really about the hardware, it's about the software. So yes, Leopard IS Apple's answer to Vista.
Filling in niches like a sub-notebook isn't going to dramatically make a difference and a Digitimes rumour isn't the most solid of things to put your beliefs on or hang your purchasing decisions on.
Let's face it, integrated graphics blow.
Let's face it, integrated graphics are more than most people actually need, run CoreGraphics just fine and require a 20th of the power some discrete graphics chips use. Perfect for most laptops in fact that never see anything more complicated than a dashboard widget or a copy of Word. They got a bad rap when they first came out, and rightly so, but the recent chips like the 950 aren't half bad.
Seems to me like you'd want to start selling 'Leopard ready' notebooks by the time Leopard actually ships, but there are arguments pro and con. I myself would feel ripped off if I bought a Leopard notebook and then found out that it can't really take advantage of what Leopard and compliant apps can do.
Er, the current laptops are 'leopard ready'. I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s. You don't need a ultra-high dpi screen to run leopard. That's the whole point of resolution independence. The UI scales to the screen dpi.
If you have the developer tools installed, why not play with it now in Tiger. Launch the Quartz Debug tool and set the resolution you want. I quite like 0.83 scale on my iMac. Then launch an application to see it magically scale everything. You'll also note glitches all over the place in some applications.
The OS has been ready for some time. It's the applications that aren't.
I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s.
Which they don't, but your point stands.
The OS has been ready for some time. It's the applications that aren't.
Well, in Tiger, there's some stuff lacking. Most importantly, the user interface controls are only provided in 1x1, whereas for Leopard, they'll also be provided in 4x4.
Er, the current laptops are 'leopard ready'. I'd guess even my 2001 iBook would be 'leopard ready' provided they're still supporting G3s. You don't need a ultra-high dpi screen to run leopard. That's the whole point of resolution independence. The UI scales to the screen dpi.
You might be missing my point. Sure, you can run Leopard on current notebooks if you want to, but taking full advantage of resolution-independence in the way that many people will want to means high-res/high dpi notebook screens, like 1680x1050 (which are already offered on the PC side on 15" models).
I'm aware that app support for res-independence will lag behind Leopard's release, but still, if I buy a notebook that has Leopard pre-installed, I'd want it to be able to take full advantage of Leopard's features. So as a consumer, I'd likely want my Leopard laptop to be able to run high-res & have high dpi.
.